Update ``pydocstringformatter`` to 0.4.0 (#5787)

1 files changed, 18 insertions, 18 deletions

diff --git a/tests/benchmark/test_baseline_benchmarks.py b/tests/benchmark/test_baseline_benchmarks.py
index 5227ca5ae..4865a3bd5 100644
--- a/tests/benchmark/test_baseline_benchmarks.py
+++ b/tests/benchmark/test_baseline_benchmarks.py
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-""" Profiles basic -jX functionality """
+"""Profiles basic -jX functionality."""
 # Copyright (c) 2020-2021 Pierre Sassoulas <pierre.sassoulas@gmail.com>
 # Copyright (c) 2020 hippo91 <guillaume.peillex@gmail.com>
 # Copyright (c) 2020 Claudiu Popa <pcmanticore@gmail.com>
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ def _empty_filepath():
 
 
 class SleepingChecker(BaseChecker):
-    """A checker that sleeps, the wall-clock time should reduce as we add workers
+    """A checker that sleeps, the wall-clock time should reduce as we add workers.
 
     As we apply a roughly constant amount of "work" in this checker any variance is
     likely to be caused by the pylint system.
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ class SleepingChecker(BaseChecker):
     sleep_duration = 0.5  # the time to pretend we're doing work for
 
     def process_module(self, _node: nodes.Module) -> None:
-        """Sleeps for `sleep_duration` on each call
+        """Sleeps for `sleep_duration` on each call.
 
         This effectively means each file costs ~`sleep_duration`+framework overhead
         """
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ class SleepingChecker(BaseChecker):
 
 
 class SleepingCheckerLong(BaseChecker):
-    """A checker that sleeps, the wall-clock time should reduce as we add workers
+    """A checker that sleeps, the wall-clock time should reduce as we add workers.
 
     As we apply a roughly constant amount of "work" in this checker any variance is
     likely to be caused by the pylint system.
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ class SleepingCheckerLong(BaseChecker):
     sleep_duration = 0.5  # the time to pretend we're doing work for
 
     def process_module(self, _node: nodes.Module) -> None:
-        """Sleeps for `sleep_duration` on each call
+        """Sleeps for `sleep_duration` on each call.
 
         This effectively means each file costs ~`sleep_duration`+framework overhead
         """
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ class SleepingCheckerLong(BaseChecker):
 
 
 class NoWorkChecker(BaseChecker):
-    """A checker that sleeps, the wall-clock time should change as we add threads"""
+    """A checker that sleeps, the wall-clock time should change as we add threads."""
 
     __implements__ = (pylint.interfaces.IRawChecker,)
 
@@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ class NoWorkChecker(BaseChecker):
     group="baseline",
 )
 class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
-    """Naive benchmarks for the high-level pylint framework
+    """Naive benchmarks for the high-level pylint framework.
 
     Because this benchmarks the fundamental and common parts and changes seen here will
     impact everything else
@@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
     lot_of_files = 500
 
     def test_baseline_benchmark_j1(self, benchmark):
-        """Establish a baseline of pylint performance with no work
+        """Establish a baseline of pylint performance with no work.
 
         We will add extra Checkers in other benchmarks.
 
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_benchmark_j10(self, benchmark):
-        """Establish a baseline of pylint performance with no work across threads
+        """Establish a baseline of pylint performance with no work across threads.
 
         Same as `test_baseline_benchmark_j1` but we use -j10 with 10 fake files to
         ensure end-to-end-system invoked.
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_benchmark_check_parallel_j10(self, benchmark):
-        """Should demonstrate times very close to `test_baseline_benchmark_j10`"""
+        """Should demonstrate times very close to `test_baseline_benchmark_j10`."""
         linter = PyLinter(reporter=Reporter())
 
         # Create file per worker, using all workers
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_lots_of_files_j1(self, benchmark):
-        """Establish a baseline with only 'master' checker being run in -j1
+        """Establish a baseline with only 'master' checker being run in -j1.
 
         We do not register any checkers except the default 'master', so the cost is just
         that of the system with a lot of files registered
@@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_lots_of_files_j10(self, benchmark):
-        """Establish a baseline with only 'master' checker being run in -j10
+        """Establish a baseline with only 'master' checker being run in -j10.
 
         As with the -j1 variant above `test_baseline_lots_of_files_j1`, we do not
         register any checkers except the default 'master', so the cost is just that of
@@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_lots_of_files_j1_empty_checker(self, benchmark):
-        """Baselines pylint for a single extra checker being run in -j1, for N-files
+        """Baselines pylint for a single extra checker being run in -j1, for N-files.
 
         We use a checker that does no work, so the cost is just that of the system at
         scale
@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_lots_of_files_j10_empty_checker(self, benchmark):
-        """Baselines pylint for a single extra checker being run in -j10, for N-files
+        """Baselines pylint for a single extra checker being run in -j10, for N-files.
 
         We use a checker that does no work, so the cost is just that of the system at
         scale, across workers
@@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_benchmark_j1_single_working_checker(self, benchmark):
-        """Establish a baseline of single-worker performance for PyLinter
+        """Establish a baseline of single-worker performance for PyLinter.
 
         Here we mimic a single Checker that does some work so that we can see the
         impact of running a simple system with -j1 against the same system with -j10.
@@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_benchmark_j10_single_working_checker(self, benchmark):
-        """Establishes baseline of multi-worker performance for PyLinter/check_parallel
+        """Establishes baseline of multi-worker performance for PyLinter/check_parallel.
 
         We expect this benchmark to take less time that test_baseline_benchmark_j1,
         `error_margin*(1/J)*(numfiles*SleepingChecker.sleep_duration)`
@@ -310,7 +310,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_benchmark_j1_all_checks_single_file(self, benchmark):
-        """Runs a single file, with -j1, against all plug-ins
+        """Runs a single file, with -j1, against all plug-ins.
 
         ... that's the intent at least.
         """
@@ -327,7 +327,7 @@ class TestEstablishBaselineBenchmarks:
         ), f"Expected no errors to be thrown: {pprint.pformat(runner.linter.reporter.messages)}"
 
     def test_baseline_benchmark_j1_all_checks_lots_of_files(self, benchmark):
-        """Runs lots of files, with -j1, against all plug-ins
+        """Runs lots of files, with -j1, against all plug-ins.
 
         ... that's the intent at least.
         """